[ QUOTE ]

The idea of the test is to separate good players from average players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here you can detect is someone knows basic strategies and basic maths about the game. It doesn't mean your are even average if you know that. And some players do pretty well without that too.

I would think more of a quizz like the problems in Harrington on hold'em. Those are already more subtul and he still chose hands where the answers are pretty obvious for a good player. For that you need to describe situations where you incorpore reads and styles and blind levels.

I'm sure you can find a lot of them in the threads at 2+2. For the maths I would chose some examples similar to the ones in weighing the odds in Hold'em Poker.

You can also ask the size of a pot size bet when you are acting after a bettor and lots of people forget to separate the call from the raise. So they mini raise thinking they are raising the size of the pot.

The situation with Johnny Chan is caricatural. Ok you made your point about folding KK, but why does he overbet the pot? Unless there is three players putting 1000, but you only said there was lots of action and it is 1000 to him.

For the last question a call is +EV because you are 64% favorite against random cards (pokerstove). But if it is that early in the tournment and I have only the big blind in the pot, I'm not sure. If he turns two overcards and you loose that hand, you'll feel terrible. The situation is not very realistic. Of course if you are against the best players in the world, that's the best spot you'll have but why would they do that?

You could keep this part and a add a second part about reads and decisions. Just a suggestion though.